>>2322128The worst part of the L is the fact that there's no side pockets for water bottles.
I have the S, M, L, 302, and the 339.
YMMV because I have very prominent clavicles and overall I'm pretty lanky (6ft 160 or so)
S - Good for in the woods day pack. Surprisingly comfortable for the lack of padding on the straps, but I do use their little seat pad in the back. The MOLLE on here is pretty pointless, though. (8/10 - a bombproof day pack option, a little too overbuilt though)
M - I use it for long day hikes in which I expect the weather to change and layers to come on and off. I've used it for some summer overnighters too. It's okay but the belt is a joke and overall it's not comfortable. (7/10 - decent if you really need the MOLLE or durability, but you can do better)
L - Eh. I don't think this would make a good day pack because of the weight and bulk even if compressed. Decent for 1-3 days but I would rather backpack with my Dutch surplus over this. Like this guy said:
>>2321721 the belt is kinda useless if you have a waist of 30" or less. The padding is pretty hard everywhere that's not the lumbar. This is usually the pack I regret buying, honestly. (5/10 - there are better options)
202 - Really nice city pack. Love this little guy. Rolls up well, no frills, no obnoxious branding. My only issue with it is that it doesn't have a side pocket for a water bottle. Probably my favorite Savotta purchase, oddly enough. (9/10)
339 - This thing is great, too. Overlooked but I find it very comfortable even without a hip belt. It suffers the same problem with ALICE packs in that it doesn't pack very high, but instead it packs wide and out. That said, it's comfortable, unique, and well made. The zipper for quick access is pointless, though, and honestly deducts a few points because it is a fail point and can also let water in as well. It's enormous so its use is limited as it doesn't compress much. (8/10)
t. bag collector
